Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8998 total)
66 online now:
jar, Juvenissun, PaulK, PsychMJC, PurpleYouko, Tangle (6 members, 60 visitors)
Newest Member: Juvenissun
Post Volume: Total: 879,584 Year: 11,332/23,288 Month: 584/1,763 Week: 223/328 Day: 14/36 Hour: 1/1

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Police Shootings
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 224 of 531 (852850)
05-18-2019 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 223 by Percy
05-14-2019 8:51 PM


Re: Texas Police Officer Commits Another Shooting
The lawyer for Pamela Turner is speaking out (see Message 223 for information about the murder). Turns out the police officer who murdered Turner is a neighbor who knew she suffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

Based on this new information I'm upping my estimate of the Baytown payout: $10 million.

I still think officer Juan Delacruz will not face any charges or discipline, but it's more iffy now. He's currently on paid administrative leave, but that's standard.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Percy, posted 05-14-2019 8:51 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 225 of 531 (852871)
05-18-2019 10:15 PM


Our Finest at Work Again
This one’s almost too out there to believe, but apparently two Anaheim police officers fired 76 shots from their moving vehicle, many through their own windshield, while pursuing a suspect through a dense residential neighborhood. The suspect was thought to be armed but was found to be packing only an air gun. The suspect eventually brought his vehicle to a stop and despite the efforts of paramedics died at the scene.

Incredibly, neither officer will face charges, but one was fired and the other placed on paid administrative leave. These guys really shouldn’t have guns.

Source: 76 Shots, 2 Cops, and a Deadly Chase Through a Residential Neighborhood

—Percy

Edited by Percy, : Grammar.


  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 226 of 531 (853060)
05-22-2019 8:42 AM


A Rare Indictment
Yesterday an Essex County, NJ, grand jury indicted Newark police officer Jovanny Crespo in the murder of Gregory C. Griffin, who drove off from a traffic stop with passenger Andrew Dixon after a report from another officer that she'd spotted a handgun in Griffin's car.

Crespo's driver pulled Griffin over, Crespo ran to the driver's side of Griffin's car, and when Griffin sped away he fired three shots into the car. Crespo claimed a gun was pointed at him. A minute later Griffin's car stopped at an intersection, Crespo again exited his police vehicle, then fired three more shots into the car as it again sped away. A mile further down the road Griffin's car came to a stop, Crespo ran to the passenger door, fired two more shots into the vehicle, then opened the door and pulled Mr. Dixon out. Mr. Griffin was slumped in the driver's seat. He died in hospital the next day.

Some police officers seem to think it's the wild west out there.

The Newark Police Department remains under a federal consent decree after a federal investigation identified a number of problems.

Source: Newark Police Officer Is Charged in Shooting Death of Fleeing Driver

--Percy


  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 227 of 531 (853182)
05-23-2019 10:40 AM


Should police officers even have Tasers?
Recent incidents documented in passing in these pages, which are primarily focused on police shootings with guns, say that police shouldn't have Tasers, either. The same poor training and judgment that argues against police having guns also argues against their having Tasers.

Maggie Thomas was parked in her car with her 4-year old daughter when she was approached by Atlanta police Sergeant James Hines who began questioning her. He discovered the car had no insurance and told her not to drive it. Returning to his vehicle he ran her name and discovered an outstanding warrant for a speeding ticket. Hines returned to Thomas's car at which point the incident escalated. Hines pulled Thomas from her car, slammed her to the ground, punched her in the face, tased her, and placed her in handcuffs, all in front of her 4-year daughter.

There's a video. It's sad that without these videos so little police misbehavior would come to light - the testimony of police officers is given much more weight than that of those wronged. For example, Hines claimed Thomas bit him, but there's no indication of this, not on the video and not on his person:

The warrant was later found to have been issued in error. Charges against Thomas have been dropped.

Hines was dismissed on May 17, 2019.

Thomas still bears the marks of Hines attack, and she and her daughter are both in counseling.

Source: Atlanta cop fired after video shows him slamming, deploying stun gun on woman

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Original YouTube video removed, replaced with a news report that includes the video.


  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 228 of 531 (854396)
06-08-2019 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by Minnemooseus
05-04-2019 2:38 AM


Re: Minneapolis Police Officer Convicted Of Murder In 911 Caller Death
Justine Damond's murderer, former Minneapolis police officer Mohamed Noor, has been sentenced to 12-½ years for the crime. At his sentencing he accepted responsibility and expressed regret.

Source: Justine Damond: US policeman jailed for Australian's murder

Most police do not need to carry weapons. Loud parties, wellness checks, routine patrols and so forth do not require armed officers. For reports of crimes in progress, shots fired, violent disputes and so forth, then you send specially trained officers.

Former officer Noor should not be suffering the lion's share of the punishment. The $20 million Minneapolis is paying out is small potatoes for a city that size, plus it's very likely the insurance company that is paying, so Minneapolis is getting away almost scot free.

The jury apparently didn't buy Noor's argument at the criminal trial that he was a victim of his own department's training, but I do buy it, assuming it's true. It must have received a great deal of credence in the civil suit, otherwise Minneapolis wouldn't be paying out $20 million. Reread Message 215 where Noor describes his training. He was trained to shoot first or you might die. We don't want people with this kind of training walking our streets, and it was the city of Minneapolis that provided that training.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by Minnemooseus, posted 05-04-2019 2:38 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 229 of 531 (855081)
06-16-2019 9:05 AM


Disastrous Shooting Averted
As recounted in a Washington Post article, a 4-year old took a doll from a store, and police terrorized the parents by pulling their weapons and assaulting them, their young children looking on in confused horror. Video is available, and NBC News had a story that includes portions of it:

The full video is available in the article.

It is very fortunate no one was hurt. The parents are suing the city of Phoenix for $10 million. I'm guessing they'll settle out of court for an undisclosed amount, but that it will be in the neighborhood of $2 million.

The problem I see here is that it is too easy for police to slip into a frame of mind where lack of instant obedience is perceived as resisting, then the police go into full threat mode. Note the police accusation of feeling threatened. When police are in this frame of mind everything's a threat.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

Edited by Percy, : Add a word to improve clarity.


Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by caffeine, posted 06-17-2019 10:45 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 232 of 531 (857895)
07-13-2019 6:43 AM


Suicide by Cop
From news reports and statements by the family it seems that Hanna Williams, 17, was depressed and upset when she stole her family's rented SUV on July 5th and headed down an Anaheim freeway. Her father became concerned and called 911, but by that time Hanna was dead. She had sped past an officer taking his police dog to the vet. He attempted to pull Hanna over, but she purposefully stuck his vehicle, pulled a U-turn to point the wrong way, then came to a stop.

The officer exited his vehicle only to find Hanna in a shooting stance pointing a gun at him. He immediately pulled his gun and fired. Hanna, shot in the chest, died at the hospital a short while later.

Body cam footage shows that the officer behaved completely appropriately. I can't find the complete body cam footage online, but here's a news report that includes a short segment of the footage that I've positioned at the exact right spot. You may have to work a little to stop the video at the exact right spot, but when you do you'll see Hanna in a shooting stance with a gun pointed directly at the cop:

The police investigation isn't over yet, but to me this seems an obvious example of suicide by cop. Hanna's gun was a harmless replica. The cop, who hasn't been identified, could not know that and had no choice but to fire.

This incident is full of ambivalence. Does a canine officer need to carry a gun? If he hadn't carried a gun then Hanna would still be alive. But if Hanna's gun had been real then the officer might be dead, in fact would be dead if Hanna was a good shot because she had the jump on him. This occurred on a freeway, putting members of the public in danger. Should the officer have exited his vehicle and strode toward her once he knew that Hanna had exited hers? Should he instead have immediately taken cover and called for backup, just because of the erratic behavior and it not being known yet whether Hanna was armed?

Here's a news story: Body camera video shows teen fatally shot by officer on freeway appeared to have handgun

--Percy


Replies to this message:
 Message 233 by Chiroptera, posted 07-13-2019 11:35 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 237 of 531 (859797)
08-03-2019 7:36 AM


Another Wellness Check Gone Wrong
Well, here's a new way to do it: Cop Fires At Woman's Dog, Kills Woman

30-year old Margarita Brooks was passed out in a grassy area of Arlington, Texas, when she was approached by a young officer only a month out of training conducting a wellness check. He asked her if she was alright and if this was her dog. The dog, a small beagle/Labrador retriever mix, charged the officer who fired three shots that only grazed the dog but struck Miss Brooks in the chest. She was pronounced dead at the hospital.

Yet another wellness check gone horribly wrong. Brooks was the daughter of Arlington's Fire Department Captain Troy Brooks. I'm betting the family all liked guns and still do.

Imagine that, wellness checks a menace to the public. Everything would likely have been fine if the officer had conducted no wellness check at all, or if he hadn't been carrying a gun. If you're carrying anything that can hurt people like a gun or a taser or a baton then you shouldn't be conducting wellness checks. Those things are the opposite of what is needed for a wellness check. Wellness checks should be conducted by people carrying not guns but little black bags of handy medical equipment like a stethoscope, Tylenol, inhalers, Narcan, etc. If the situation appears dangerous then they stand down and call police for backup. In this case they would have called an animal control officer.

Another very significant issue: This happened around 5:30 in the afternoon, likely at a public park or some similar public space. How many other people were in the park, including children? Yet this officer fired three shots indiscriminately in essentially random directions. Whatever direction the dog was coming at him from, that's the direction he fired.

There's no new news in the wrongful death case against South Pasadena in the shooting death of actress Vanessa Marquez who was killed during a wellness check back in August of last year. The subthread begins at Message 132:


Actress Vanessa Marquez

--Percy


Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by LamarkNewAge, posted 08-03-2019 9:37 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 243 of 531 (860740)
08-11-2019 8:05 AM
Reply to: Message 239 by Hyroglyphx
08-05-2019 6:32 PM


Re: Dayton Shooting
You're misrepresenting the proposal you're indirectly referring to. The proposal is not to keep the citizenry armed while disarming the police. It's to disarm everyone, including the police except for specially trained units. In particular we must eliminate from the entire country all weapons that fire highly lethal small, fast, light bullets. Here are the entry and exit wounds from an M4 round. The M4 is not too dissimilar from the AR-15:

Shown on the left is the bullet entrance wound through the right buttock. Shown on the right is the bullet exit wound through the thigh. If you're having trouble orienting yourself on that right photo, click on it to blow it up. He's lying on his back with his torso to the left. His right thigh is in the foreground. His genitals are near the top, as is his left ankle. Once you have a clear idea of how the patient is oriented you can see the massive damage created by the exit wound to the right thigh. We have to get rid of weapons that can inflict such massive trauma to the body.

People hit in the trunk by such bullets often die. They at least suffer massive life-changing damage. If hit in the lower trunk then huge parts of the digestive system can be pulverized, or the liver, or a kidney. If hit in the upper trunk then it had better be the right hand side where it will only pulverize the lung. If it hits anywhere near the left hand side then it will pulverize the heart.

Here's an article by a radiologist who describes the damage these guns can do: What I Saw Treating the Victims From Parkland Should Change the Debate on Guns

So, you gun nuts out there with your concealed carry or your open carry or whatever you carry, is this the kind of weapon your pop guns are really going to protect you from?

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 239 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-05-2019 6:32 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-11-2019 1:37 PM Percy has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 250 of 531 (860816)
08-12-2019 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 244 by Hyroglyphx
08-11-2019 1:37 PM


Re: Dayton Shooting
Hyroglyphx writes:

You're misrepresenting the proposal you're indirectly referring to. The proposal is not to keep the citizenry armed while disarming the police. It's to disarm everyone, including the police except for specially trained units.

That won't happen.

No one's claiming it will happen. I'm merely pointing out that that's the only effective solution. I acknowledge the difficulties in getting from where we are to where we have to be.

In particular we must eliminate from the entire country all weapons that fire highly lethal small, fast, light bullets. Here are the entry and exit wounds from an M4 round. The M4 is not too dissimilar from the AR-15

An M4 and an AR15 are all variants of the M16 -- all which uses a standard .223 or .556 caliber round.

And they're too deadly to be in the hands of civilians, or much of anyone, actually.

We have to get rid of weapons that can inflict such massive trauma to the body.

Its the subsonic speed at which the round travels that causes cavitation like that. But then a shotgun slug produces even more trauma than that. Its kind of a moot point. You can kill someone with a steak knife just as easily as you could a butcher knife. Are we measuring by the grotesqueness of a wound? What metric are we using here?

The metric is deadliness. Shotguns can be grouped with assault weapons. Knives cannot compare in deadliness to assault weapons.

So, you gun nuts out there with your concealed carry or your open carry or whatever you carry, is this the kind of weapon your pop guns are really going to protect you from?

Yes. Those "pop guns" were exactly the same caliber (probably 9mm) that killed the Dayton gunmen.... by an armed police force.... in less than 30 seconds.

Yes, so typical, police officers patrolling just doors away when gunfire erupted and with the gunman's attention focused away from them. 10 dead and 27 wounded in just 32 seconds. These types of weapons do not belong in civilian hands.

I'm sure you assume that I'm a member of NRA or whatever... I'm not. I'm just a regular guy.

You're a gun nut who rationalizes the instruments of so much death.

I am in favor of regulating deadly weapons...

How about banning deadly weapons.

...and doing everything possible to keep them out of the hands of dangerous felons without keeping them out of the hands of people trying to protect themselves from those dangerous felons.

Guns make you less safe, not more. You're buying into the myth that a gun is a defensive instrument. It isn't.

But I do agree with one premise that they advocate.... If you give them an inch, they'll take a mile.

I don't know what this means. If you're talking about the NRA, you brought them up, not me.

We all know the end game is total and complete disarmament. No politician is stupid enough to outright say the things that you're saying, but we know that's the ultimate motive.

Accusing the people you're negotiating with of lying, dissembling and misrepresentation is probably not a good way to start.

And how it will be done is by banning this first and then going for that down the line; incrementally trying to change the landscape.

First we ban assault weapons, then we implement 100% background checks, gun registration, licensing, and home inspections. But those are gun control issues and this is the Police Shootings thread, so I'll repeat that most police should not be carrying guns.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-11-2019 1:37 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-12-2019 2:05 PM Percy has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 255 of 531 (860868)
08-12-2019 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by Hyroglyphx
08-12-2019 2:05 PM


Re: Dayton Shooting
We should probably move the gun control part of this discussion to the Gun Control III thread, but I'll reply to most of what you say.

Hyroglyphx writes:

The metric is deadliness. Shotguns can be grouped with assault weapons. Knives cannot compare in deadliness to assault weapons.

I'm just clarifying because you showed images of entrance and exit wounds, as it to insinuate that the more grotesque or horrific the injury that it should correspond to whether or not it should be accessible to civilians.

The images illustrate why assault rifles are so much more deadly than normal firearms, because of what the bullets do once they enter the body. I'm sorry if anyone found the exit wound grotesque or horrific. It wasn't my intention to shock but to illustrate why these weapons are so much more lethal than firearms that fire bullets at much lower velocities. Such deadliness doesn't belong in the hands of civilians.

A hunting rifle is even more powerful though and the ballistic wounds they inflict on the human body are even more pronounced.

If some types of hunting rifles become a public menace like assault rifles then we can think about banning those, too, but if you look at the Wikipedia article on Mass Shootings in the United States you won't find hunting rifles mentioned once.

Yes, so typical, police officers patrolling just doors away when gunfire erupted and with the gunman's attention focused away from them. 10 dead and 27 wounded in just 32 seconds. These types of weapons do not belong in civilian hands.

You advanced a theory that stated police should not be armed, except for SWAT teams. This event gives you tangible evidence of why police are armed. Your alternative was a much higher body count while waiting for SWAT to arrive. Neutralized in 30 seconds is a lot better than 30 minutes... and I'm being extremely generous with a 30 minute turn around.

Again, that's just so typical that six police officers were patrolling a short distance away, right? That's the typical response time in Dayton, just 32 seconds, right? And that's why you're using this example as part of your argument, because you know it's representative, right?

The message of Dayton is that an assault rifle was able to kill 10 and injure 27 in in just 32 seconds. Assault weapons must be banned, and ultimately we should disarm everyone except special units.

This thread is not talking about civilians being armed,...

True, as I mentioned up top.

...its about "Police Shootings" and your advancement of the belief that police should not be armed.

That's true, but again, you're being repeatedly misleading. The proposal is not to disarm the police while allowing everyone else to remain armed. The proposal is to disarm everyone except special police units.

Here is the reason why they should.

If no one's armed then it's no reason.

You're a gun nut who rationalizes the instruments of so much death.

I rationalize the necessity while lamenting the fact that it is an unfortunate reality. I approach reality as it is, not how I wish it to be.

We should accept reality as it, but not accept that it must always be so.

Guns make you less safe, not more. You're buying into the myth that a gun is a defensive instrument. It isn't.

Except when it is.

Except it never is. A shield or a vest is a defensive device. A gun only protects by going offensive. A gun's offensive nature is why this thread exists, because so many police "defend" themselves by shooting people. A situation described several times in this thread is of deceased civilians lying on the ground next to their cell phones who are no longer a threat, but then they weren't a threat before, either.

But as usual, your side of the aisle...

My side of the aisle? I don't have a side or an aisle. I'm a voice of one here advocating for disarming everyone as far as I know.

...never wants to address the actual problem and instead focuses on the instrument used.

More training is not the answer.

Accusing the people you're negotiating with of lying, dissembling and misrepresentation is probably not a good way to start.

Its the truth. Its the death by a thousand cuts strategy.

I think a better approach is to treat people as you would want to be treated.

police should not be carrying guns.

So instead of increasing police proficiency you'd rather police just be useless. That's a great plan, Percy. That way the Dayton shooter would have killed 5 times as many.

I don't understand why you've made this misleading statement multiple times in a single message. Again, the proposal is to disarm everyone, not just the police. I'd like us to eventually join Iceland, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-12-2019 2:05 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by DrJones*, posted 08-12-2019 5:46 PM Percy has responded
 Message 265 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-13-2019 12:33 AM Percy has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 261 of 531 (860879)
08-12-2019 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by DrJones*
08-12-2019 5:46 PM


Re: Dayton Shooting
DrJones* writes:

The images illustrate why assault rifles are so much more deadly than normal firearms, because of what the bullets do once they enter the body.

there are multitudes of non assault rifles that fire 5.56NATO/.223REM. Being fired from an M-4 doesn't make a round more deadly than an identical one fired from a REM700.

Is your point that it isn't just assault rifles that fire high velocity rounds? If so then yes, I understand. In my view we don't need weapon/ammunition combos that cause such massive bodily harm. They should be off limits to civilians.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by DrJones*, posted 08-12-2019 5:46 PM DrJones* has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 263 by DrJones*, posted 08-13-2019 12:07 AM Percy has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 264 of 531 (860889)
08-13-2019 12:29 AM
Reply to: Message 263 by DrJones*
08-13-2019 12:07 AM


Re: Dayton Shooting
DrJones* writes:

so you want to take away all the hunting rifles as well

The ones with high velocity bullets, sure. What was the muzzle velocity of hunting rifles a hundred fifty years ago when hunting was more of a necessity?

—Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by DrJones*, posted 08-13-2019 12:07 AM DrJones* has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


(2)
Message 271 of 531 (860932)
08-13-2019 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by Hyroglyphx
08-13-2019 12:33 AM


Re: Dayton Shooting
I'm switching back to the topic. I'll address everything in your post related to police shootings.

And here's another point: Canadian police carry guns. Australian cops carry guns. Swedish cops carry guns. German cops carry guns. French cops carry guns. But your sole issue seems to be with American cops.

Nope.

Your reply will likely be that those police agencies don't kill hundreds of people a year like American cops.

Nope.

But a point to consider is that police departments outside the US are not driven into a high state of paranoia by the possibility of a highly armed civilian with more firepower than a British battalion from the Revolutionary War, so they're less likely to pull the trigger.

But doesn't that speak to the point that a better trained police force is a safer police force?

This point was last raised in February, and the answer hasn't changed. The reason training won't solve the police shooting problem is the same as why training won't solve the motor vehicle accident problem: it's impossible to maintain a high level of training across so many people.

Or at the very least, it just makes common friggin' sense that so long as arms are available to civilian population that police be able to meet those challenges with a fighting chance?

This point has been raised and answered several times before, not just in my last few messages but also in the very message you're replying to. You quote it just a little bit further on.

It would at least make more sense to first disarm the populace to give these cops a fighting chance.

Okay, I give up, you got me. You've raised this point several times in this thread, and I've given the same answer each time, but I admit now that I've been lying. What I really want is to disarm the police but not the civilians. When I said stuff like, "I don't know how we get from where we are to where we need to be," what I really meant was that I want to render the police defenseless in the face of an armed citizenry. Way to go, Sherlock, you figured out my secret plot.

The message of Dayton is that an assault rifle was able to kill 10 and injure 27 in in just 32 seconds. Assault weapons must be banned, and ultimately we should disarm everyone except special units.

Maybe you might find it ironic that the Dayton shooter shared your beliefs on the subject.

There's nothing in your link resembling my beliefs. Accuracy isn't your strong point, is it.

The take away is that he was a sick and deluded kid... one of many. You might recall Austin had a serial bomber about a year ago. He used all kinds of homemade items to create his bombs. The focal point isn't the items or tools its the sick mind and how to reach these sick bastards before they fall off of the cliff of sanity. Sick people will always find ways to kill people... as much as it sucks, serial killers and spree killers exist. They just do. For them, their path is kill or be killed.

The evidence says the fewer the guns the fewer the murders.

That's true, but again, you're being repeatedly misleading. The proposal is not to disarm the police while allowing everyone else to remain armed. The proposal is to disarm everyone except special police units.

Why do you suppose even nations where guns are heavily restricted still carry arms? Spoiler alert: Because people still get a hold of them... and because a gun isn't the only weapon capable of justifying deadly force. If someone has a machete you don't pull out your pepper spray.

Your meaning is unclear. Are you talking about police, civilians or both?

Except it never is. A shield or a vest is a defensive device. A gun only protects by going offensive. A gun's offensive nature is why this thread exists, because so many police "defend" themselves by shooting people. A situation described several times in this thread is of deceased civilians lying on the ground next to their cell phones who are no longer a threat, but then they weren't a threat before, either.

Did you have a specific case in mind?

No. Any of the ones mentioned in this thread will do.

More training is not the answer.

Except in Canada. Or Australia. Or wherever, so long as it isn't the US.

Your meaning is unclear again, I won't try to guess.

I don't understand why you've made this misleading statement multiple times in a single message. Again, the proposal is to disarm everyone, not just the police. I'd like us to eventually join Iceland, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom.

Maybe you should move there then.

Gee, why does this sound so familiar?

The 2nd Amendment shall not be infringed

Spoken like a true gun nut.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-13-2019 12:33 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by Theodoric, posted 08-13-2019 10:45 PM Percy has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 273 of 531 (860940)
08-14-2019 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by Theodoric
08-13-2019 10:45 PM


Re: Dayton Shooting
Theodoric writes:

quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This too can be amended.

And in the meantime it could be interpreted as written.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Theodoric, posted 08-13-2019 10:45 PM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Theodoric, posted 08-14-2019 8:56 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020